Royal perverts and pedophiles in this week's dubious tabloids

Accuracy takes yet another vacation in this week's tawdry tabloids.

"Real Reason Tiger Woods Drove Off Cliff!" screams the headline of the 'National Enquirer' cover story, It's noteworthy because the golfing ace did not drive off a cliff – he swerved across a curving highway heading downhill and careened through a signpost, a tree, and rolled over several times before coming to a halt. No cliffs were involved.

Secondly, the 'Enquirer' fails to tell readers the "real reason" Woods crashed, because they simply don't know.

A doctor who has never treated the athlete tells the 'Enquirer' that he could have been distracted by lingering back pain, and the rag reports that he was "eager to get to a TV taping" on the morning of the accident. A local resident muses that accidents happen "if you're picking something up or glancing at your phone."

But those are entirely speculative possibilities. Who knows the "real reason" why people read the 'Enquirer'? Perhaps it's to distract from back pain while reaching for one's phone?

"Queen Disowns Harry & His Kids!" declares the banner across the top of the 'Globe' cover,with a story that confidently asserts: "Prince Harry is booted off the line of succession, guaranteeing that he and high-maintenance wife Meghan will NEVER sit on the throne, palace insiders say!"

It's all utter nonsense, of course, with the 'Globe' treating the Royal Family as if they were the cast of HBO series 'Succession,' constantly battling for position to take over what the royals wryly call The Firm.

Though Harry and Meghan have been relieved of all royal duties, and Harry stripped of his ceremonial patronages, the prince's place in the line of succession remains unchanged at Number 6.

It would require the deaths of Prince Charles, Prince William, and William's children Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis before Harry could ascend to the throne – an event so unlikely as to be almost unthinkable, unless the entire Royal Family decide to squeeze into a small SUV for a vacation up some narrow single-lane unmade mountain road winding high up in the Andes and deliberately don't invite Harry, who by chance happens to be driving a large truck coming downhill in the opposite direction at the same time.

And yet the 'Globe' gleefully informs readers: "Queen removes rogue from line of succession over TV betrayal."

Their act of betrayal? Telling the Queen that Harry and Meghan are still dedicated to a life of service, after Her Majesty suggested that they can no longer serve the crown at such a distance. Oh, the horror.

It's apparently a week of betrayal for Harry and Meghan, as the 'Enquirer' attacks the young royals with its "exclusive" story: "Harry & Meghan $500M Motive For Betraying The Queen!"

Meghan and Harry are allegedly "outraged at being cut loose by the British royals . . . and want revenge. Selling out Harry's family is the big way to get it," says an unnamed source. "I'm told Meghan's convinced they'll have deals totaling $500 million by the end of the year!"

But Harry and Meghan would only be selling out the Royal Family if they earned $500 million spilling all sorts of royal secrets and intimate details of life behind palace doors, creating an insider's version of 'The Crown,' and producing no-holds-barred kiss-and-tell movies about the royals' darkest secrets – and that simply isn't happening.

The duo's 'Oprah With Meghan and Harry' interview on CBS on Sunday, March 7 not withstanding, the couple are not expected to be capitalizing on anything more than their own names and limited talents.

And having secured a reported $100 million production deal with Netflix and a $20 million podcast deal with Spotify, it's hard to imagine how there's another $380 million worth of deals left for them to find.

"Julia Roberts Leaves Hubby!" screams a 'Globe' headline. "$250M Marriage Crisis." Yes, the 'Pretty Woman' star has reportedly left her husband, Daniel Moder, but only so that she can film a TV mini-series in Australia, while he looks after their school-age children in California. What the 'Globe' brands a "trial separation" is what's known in Hollywood as "working."

How stupid does the 'Globe think its readers are? "Beyoncé Bottoms Out Again" is the headline above a story claiming: "Docs say her butt is bigger." Why are doctors looking at Beyoncé's backside in the first place, since she's clearly not their patient? An unnamed "snitch" – I honestly don't know if that's someone better informed than an "insider" or a "source" or anyone purporting to be "close to" Beyoncé – claims the singer "has kept the droop out of her derriere with TWO butt jobs in a year."

To prove the point the rag displays a photo of Beyoncé "in a skin-clinging bodysuit and thigh-high boots." Except anyone looking at the photo in the 'Globe' can see that these "thigh-high" boots come only half-way up her calf, and don't even come within spitting distance of her thighs.

But who are readers going to believe – the 'Globe' story, or their own eyes?

The 'Globe' cover story is a needlessly cruel and grammatically-challenged personal attack: "Goldie Hawn – Face Is Ruined!"

Few people look their best with a cloth mask tucked under their chin and a sun visor dividing their face, but the cover photo of Hawn, aged 75, looks as if it were taken just as she was closing her eyes and about to sneeze. The 'Globe' enlists a plastic surgeon in Michigan, who has never met Hawn let alone treated her – and possibly never been in the same zip code as her – to infer from the photograph that she has had nasal fillers, facelifts, lip fillers, eyelid surgery, and chemical skin peels

It's all highly speculative, and based on a photo of one moment when Hawn looked less than her best, which hardly seems fair.

The 'Globe' reports on the ten month jail sentence meted out to Simon Bowes-Lyon for sexual assault, under the headline: "Queen's Perv Cousin Put Behind Bars!" The story is legitimate, though the rag's interpretation of events is intriguing, claiming: "His legal troubles are bad news for Her Majesty's favorite son, Prince Andrew, who is trapped in his own sex scandal involving his activities with convicted pedophile buddy Jeffrey Epstein."

Implausibly, a purported "palace courtier" tells the 'Globe': "These are dark, dark days for the monarchy. Bowes-Lyon's appalling crime feeds into the narrative that the royal family is filled with perverts and pedophiles." Spoken like a true palace courtier.

'Us' magazine devotes its cover to newlyweds Gwen Stefani and Blake Shelton, proclaiming: "Finally A Baby" Well, not quite.

Mother-of-three Stefani, aged 51, is not pregnant, and not ever planning to be. 'Us' mag claims that she and husband Shelton "have picked out a surrogate and are hoping to welcome a new baby by early next year!" Which means that they have not yet even begun the process of trying to inseminate the surrogate – if one exists. The story is premature, at best.

'People' magazine's cover commemorates the loss of Kobe Bryant and daughter Gianna 14 months ago, with an interview with his widow Vanessa Bryant under the headline: "My Girls Give Me Strength." She's even pictured wearing a Lakers jacket, in case you didn't get the connection. "You just have to get up and push forward," says Vanessa,with the indomitable spirit required of a 'People' magazine cover girl. "Lying in bed crying isn't going to change the fact that my family will never be the same again." Indeed.

Thankfully we have the crack investigative squad at 'Us' mag to tell us that Phoebe Tonkin wore it best (though how must Maggie Rogers feel, garnering a meagre 4 per cent of votes?), that Alexandra Breckenridge loves "baking bread and making quilts," and that the stars are just like us: they pump gas, feed parking meters, eat pizza by the slice and drink coffee. Those multi-tasking celebs!

Hot on the heels of a life-like Joseph Biden figurine comes an ad in the pages of the 'Enquirer' and the 'Globe' for a commemorative figure of Vice President Kamala Harris – and she talks!

Wearing a replica of the purple dress and coat Harris wore for the inauguration ceremony in January, the 14-inch doll "speaks inspirational quotes in her own voice."

Why would any self-respecting Trump-loving tabloid reader fork out $129.99 (plus $13.99 shipping and handling) for a talking Harris doll – unless perhaps to throw darts at it?

"We the people have the power to build a better future," the tiny version of the vice president intones. One can imagine Donald Trump buying one of these so that he can stick them with voodoo pins.

Impressively, the figurine comes with a highly realistic addition: "Removable mask included."

Onwards and downwards.